Cleaned or not cleaned 1877cc seated liberty dime

This coin has stumped many collectors who can usually tell right off the bat if a coins cleaned. So is it cleaned or original?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

The only thing that stands out to me are the striation marks on the obverse from 1 o clock to 8 o clock. I do think its about as original as you will likely find a coin that grade.

 

Yes that is the only reason it brings cleaning concerns to me. I think it's original.

 

I'll go with original

 

guessing it looks original

 

It's an honest little coin that obviously did its duty in commerce and has nothing to be ashamed of, cleaned or not.

 

Cleaned at some point , doesn't really matter though in that grade.

 

It has the look of an otherwise essentially original coin that was subsequently wiped, scratched, scraped (take your pick) on at least the obverse.

 

Cleaned Fine details

 

It seems like the front may have been whizzed, but it also may be an abrasion mark. Either way its a great coin

 

Looks like an abrasion or a scrape. And otherwise original skin

 

Great coin, no matter what

 

Are the lines in the first picture the only ones on the coin? If so, the coin has been scraped. If there are more scratched in other directions, then the coin has been cleaned.

 

Not, and Never. Suggest you read the thread: GTG - 1828 Capped Bust Half where members have discussed whizzing again.

 

IMO, you and others are being EXTREMLY sensitive and hard on this average circulated coin. IMO, not scraped and just a few hairlines - not even enough to suggest old cleaning.

A "Scrape" by usual definition in a grading seminar DIGS INTO THE COIN. Scrapes occur in degrees so if someone wants to say if I rub a coin across my shirt once that I have scraped it I would be forced to agree as "technically" they would be correct. But actual scrapes are damage and this coin does not qualify IMO.

 

You want to be really technical and nit-picky? Fine, I'll play along.

A scratch is defined as a single sharp object digging or scraping into the surface of a coin. This dig can be very long and fine, depending on the scratcher. Now if you have a a brush with hundreds of sharp objects, you will get a bunch of fine scratches that scrape into the surface of the coin, though the depth is microscopic.

What I think happened was that this coin was rubbed along a hard, rough surface or a wire brush, but not cleaned in the general sense. I would consider this coin to be very mildly damaged.

 

As you say , scrapes are WIDE.

 

Fundamentally, what happened to the OP's coin and this coin are the same, just one is slightly more severe than the other. Still the same TYPE of damage, but the severity determines the knock off the value.

.

 

Nice photo but that is a mighty big scrape. In fact, to call it a scrape is rather foolish IMO as it is actually so far beyond a scrape that it became just DAMAGE.

So, I disagree 100%. Please point out the deep damage from the scrape on the OP coin. Thanks.

 

So we got into this argument because I used the terminology "scraped?" Seems pretty silly.

To satisfy your quest to prove me wrong, I will say my use of "scraped" was improper and will thus change my terminology used to "brushed" to describe the diagonal hailnines evident on this coin.